Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41129773›Full record

ArticleSurgical innovation2026

Evaluation of the Ergonomics of Surgical Instruments Across Surgical Specialties: Responses From 459 Surgeons.

Maria Elze, Georg Osterhoff, Alice Wermke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical innovation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maria ElzeDepartment of Orthopedics, Trauma Surgery, and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0009-0007-4215-4218
Georg OsterhoffDepartment of Orthopedics, Trauma Surgery, and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5051-0998
Alice WermkeDepartment of Orthopedics, Trauma Surgery, and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundThe ergonomic design of surgical instruments plays a pivotal role in the efficiency, safety, and comfort of surgeons. Studies confirm that poorly designed instruments can lead to physical discomfort, premature fatigue, and decreased dexterity. This study aims to assess the current usability of surgical instruments to identify problematic designs and highlight areas for ergonomic improvements.MethodsAn anonymized online questionnaire with 18 questions was distributed via email to various surgical societies, professional associations, and the mailing lists of surgical departments at the University Hospital Leipzig. Data on gender, glove size, clinical background, surgical subspecialty, and experience were collected. Participants were asked about physical discomfort, fatigue, precision, and safety issues when using surgical instruments and devices.ResultsA total of 459 surgeons participated, most of whom specialized in orthopedics and trauma surgery (81.48%). Gender differences were noted in glove sizes and frequency of complaints. Women reported significantly more difficulties, such as fatigue and imprecise handling, compared to men. Overall, 88.1% of women and 59.9% of men considered the development of ergonomic instruments important. Only 13% had experience using ergonomic instruments, with nearly half of the participants reporting significant improvements.ConclusionsThe study demonstrates that surgical instruments with inadequate ergonomics, particularly for users with smaller glove sizes, result in physical strain, fatigue, and reduced precision. The findings underscore the necessity for ergonomic modifications to meet the physical requirements of surgeons, ensuring a more efficient and safer surgical workflow.

Indexed as

ErgonomicsSpecialties, SurgicalSurgeonsSurgical InstrumentsAdultEquipment DesignFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnairesergonomicsglove sizesurgical instrumentssurgical precision

Identifiers

PMID41129773
PMCPMC12920700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.